Assam: Resurgent
ULFA and the Indolent State
Bibhu Prasad Routray
Director, ICM Database & Documentation Centre, Guwahati
Assam's open denunciation of the United Liberation Front
of Asom's (ULFA)
renewed offensive appears to have had minimal impact on
the outfit. Seven explosions rocked Assam on August 26,
leaving five people dead and over 100 injured. Coming barely
11 days after the horrific series of blasts targeting Independence
Day celebrations on August 15 - which killed 13 people,
mostly school children, at Dhemaji - this spate of attacks
is an indication that ULFA is now far less responsive to
public opinion. However, the bigger question that confronts
Assam as it prepares itself for another bout of carnage,
is whether ULFA's escalation of terror has been matched
by an adequate State response. This certainly does not appear
to be the case.
The public
response to ULFA's latest cycle of bloodshed is, however,
a significant departure from the characteristic acquiescence
or passivity that the rebel group's excesses have ordinarily
been met with. The Independence Day explosions gave rise
to a war of words between the ULFA and the once-influential
students' body, the All Assam Students' Union (AASU). AASU
mobilised the popular revulsion aroused by the killing of
schoolchildren to organise a highly successful general strike
in the State on August 18. AASU's strong reaction was reflected
in the statement of its office bearers who raised, albeit
for the first time, doubts about ULFA's sincerity towards
the well being of the people of the State. "Paresh Baruah
has no remorse in targeting innocent children, but he dare
not speak out against illegal migrants from the neighbouring
country flooding the State." The statement declared, further:
"What ULFA is doing now is plain terrorism. But we'll not
remain spectators to these acts. We are building up public
opinion against militancy and will intensify our efforts.
The ULFA will find itself completely alienated from the
people."
The ULFA chief, however, has shown little remorse, and responded,
instead, by accusing AASU of initiating a cycle of violence
in the State and not being sufficiently committed to the
illegal migrants' issue. A statement issued on August 21
read, "AASU had no moral right to criticise the ULFA for
violence as the student body itself was involved in massacres
in Gohpur and Nellie in early 1980s." The war of words carried
on for the next few days before ULFA decided to respond
in a manner it knows best - by detonating multiple explosions,
which, according to the vernacular newspaper Pratidin,
sent 'shivers down Assam's spine'.
The political leadership in the State, however, continues
to bury its head in the sand. Responding to queries on the
law and order situation, the Union Minister of State for
Defence Production, B.K. Handique, representing Assam's
Jorhat constituency, stated on August 27, "We can only say
that it has worsened if there is a long-term spate of attacks.
What has been seen so far are random blasts."
Such complacence, a survey of the ULFA's activities in the
period since the December 2003 Bhutan operations would suggest,
is deeply misplaced. Between January 2004 and August 27,
2004, ULFA has been responsible for at least 12 attacks
on vital installations like the gas and oil pipelines and
telephone exchanges, five attacks on movie theatres, three
explosions on railway tracks, eight explosions in public
places, four attacks on police stations and security force
vehicles, three explosions inside buses and 10 attacks in
which terrorists have killed their victims by shooting from
close range. A total of 45 civilians and 15 security force
personnel have been killed in these attacks. In the month
of August alone there have been at least 16 explosions triggered
by the ULFA.
There is a definite pattern to this violence. ULFA, which
initially claimed that it only targeted symbols of the supposed
'colonial presence', is now less averse to detonating explosions
in public places. More importantly, it has been able to
execute its attacks in several districts, almost over the
entire geographical spread of the State, repudiating the
popular theory that the militant group's influence had been
reduced to few pockets. Of the 57 ULFA-related incidents
in the State between January and August 27, 2004, 31 have
taken place in the four upper Assam districts of Jorhat,
Tinsukia, Dibrugarh and Sibsagar. The remaining 26 attacks
have been executed across 11 other districts of the State.
Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi has now declared that he wants
operations to 'flush out' the militant sanctuaries in Bangladesh
and Myanmar, and now blames the National Socialist Council
of Nagaland - Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM),
Myanmar and Bangladesh for sheltering and provisioning the
outfit. Nevertheless, the Chief Minister is still to take
a completely unambiguous position on the ULFA, and continues
to emphasise 'negotiations and dialogue for peace'. In any
event, as things stand today, the possibilities of a Bhutan-type
operation in either Bangladesh or Myanmar are remote. At
the same time, any hope of the recalcitrant ULFA negotiating
peace with the Government remains a distant reverie.
The Inspector General of Police (IGP) of the Special Branch,
Khagen Sarma, has been quoted as saying that he has definite
information of Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI)
aiding ULFA, not only by supplying arms but also in defining
strategies. On August 27, the Sarma stated: "We have got
definite information that ISI is supplying arms and ammunition
to ULFA for conducting bomb blasts throughout the state."
The State police department has spent both energy and resources
in building up a case against the ULFA and its activities
in Bangladesh by collecting copies of passports issued by
Pakistan to ULFA leaders, residential addresses of the ULFA
leaders in Bangladesh, as well as details of their business
and other activities. However, on August 9, speaking in
the State Legislative Assembly, Minister of State for Home,
Rockybul Hussain, said that the State Government possessed
'no direct evidence' of ISI activities in the State. Such
ambivalence within the target State will have to be abandoned
long before Gogoi can reasonably expect either Bangladesh
or Myanmar to respond.
A high measure of moral ambiguity is pervasive among several
political parties and other organisations in Assam. Criticising
the State administration for the August 15 explosions, a
leader of the Assam Gana Parishad (AGP) termed the killings
'custodial deaths', squarely blaming the State Government
for having asked the school children to attend the function.
The reaction of the Manab Adhikar Sangram Samiti (MASS),
which has been named as a front organisation of the ULFA
by the Union Government, was in similar vein. MASS condemned
the explosion and linked it with the "years of militarisation
over democratic ideals in the northeast region." AASU too,
after its surprising public spat with the terrorist group,
was quick to demand a 100-hour unilateral ceasefire with
the ULFA in order to initiate a process of dialogue.
The limited criticism o ULFA's current violence cannot be
expected to have significant impact on the militant group's
activities. ULFA has, in the past, rejected all 'civil society'
initiatives - and there have been several by literary organisations,
artists and politicians - to bring an end to the violence
in the State. Each of these was violently rebuffed, and
Paresh Baruah has stated: "In this age of high speed communication
and internet, we do not need any mediation."
Strangely enough, the State has refused to learn, and has
displayed the most asinine responses each time ULFA leaders
have invoked the chimera of 'dialogue'. Prudence and strategic
planning have never been the virtues manifested by Assam's
rulers.
Blockade Ends,
but no Signs of a Ceasefire
Guest Writer: Keshab Poudel
Managing Editor, Spotlight Weekly Magazine, Kathmandu
Following intense pressure from civil society, the business
community and amid growing defiance by transport entrepreneurs,
the Maoists withdrew their indefinite blockade on the Kathmandu
Valley on August 24 - a week after its imposition - but
the move is yet to generate any visible signs of the resumption
of the peace process or a declaration of ceasefire between
the Government and the Maoists,
with both parties to the conflict bent on using pressure
tactics against each other.
Although
the Government had made every possible effort to minimize
the impact of the blockade, the Maoists were able to gain
significant psychological advantages by demonstrating that
the link to the Valley could be cut off through intimidation
and threat at any time. Officials and industrialists blamed
the exaggerated reporting by the domestic and international
media for the perceived Maoist 'success'.
The tourism sector, one of the country's main sources of
foreign currency, was badly affected by the week-long blockade.
Tourism entrepreneurs said they lost about five million
dollars due to cancelled bookings by foreign tourists. "The
recent blockade and its exaggerated coverage in the foreign
media have affected our business," said Basant Raj Mishra,
president of Nepalese Association of Tour.
The Maoists, on their part, have intensified their violent
activities and, of late, have been pressurising the local
population of the two eastern border districts, Ilam and
Panchthar, to vacate their houses and properties till the
second week of September.
It was substantially the Government's security arrangement
along two highways linking the capital with the Indian border
- the major supply line to the capital - that convinced
transport entrepreneurs to operate the routes despite the
blockade, and this resulted eventually in its 'suspension
for one month', as the Maoists expressed it. The blockade
did, however, result in a steep rise in prices of essential
commodities.
The Maoists, who have been fighting for a communist republic,
used every means including fear and reprisals to make the
economic blockade successful. A senior police officer was
shot dead by suspected Maoist rebels in the capital, and
there were also a number of bomb explosions, some of them
targeting Government offices and establishments, in the
Valley during the blockade.
On August 22 - four days after the economic blockade commenced
- industrialists held a big rally asking the Maoists to
withdraw their program. The rally attracted participation
by civil society members, businessmen and the general public,
and demanded the resumption of peace talks and the announcement
of a ceasefire by both the sides.
In an effort to expand the blockade to cover the only one
route into Tibet, however, the Maoists attacked an Army
platoon that was clearing obstacles on the road, killing
five soldiers on August 24.
Nevertheless, in a major achievement for the security force,
they were able to provide blanket protection to the trucks
and buses heading into the capital, though, in the initial
days of the blockade, the palpable fear kept vehicles off
the roads.
However, as the Royal Nepalese Army (RNA) beefed up its
patrolling in and around the highways, the numbers gradually
increased. The RNA also provided aerial support and chopper-patrols
of the highways to instill a sense of security and confidence
among the drivers and passengers. The vehicles plying in
and out of the capital were also escorted by Mine Protected
Vehicles. In addition, the Government decided to expedite
compensation for any vehicles damaged during the blockade
and to meet the costs of treatment of drivers or helpers
injured during the blockade. Compensation was also announced
for the families of any transporters killed, and scholarships
to be provided for the education of children of such victims.
Since the Maoists did not come out to physically block the
highways, these measures proved adequate to create a sense
of security and confidence among transporters.
The crescendo of international condemnation combined with
the growing sense of anger among ordinary residents of the
Valley, finally appears to have forced the comrades to call
it off. The European Union, the United States and most importantly,
Nepal's closest neighbour, India had expressed deep concern
during the blockade.
India's concerns are acute and mounting. With Nepal located
in the Southern Himalayas bordering India's Gangetic plain,
prolonged spell of violence and instability in the Himalayan
Kingdom have long-term security implications for its Southern
neighbour. At a time when there is reports of increasing
contacts between the Nepalese Maoists and the Maoist Communist
Centre (MCC)
of Bihar and People's War Group (PWG)
which operates in as many as ten Indian States, India is
naturally worried about the internal situation in Nepal.
Unsurprisingly, India has been providing military support
to the RNA. Two of Nepal's longest serving former Prime
Ministers, Surya Bahadur Thapa and Girija Prasad Koirala,
have also openly asserted that Indian support is necessary
to quell the insurgency in Nepal. "If Nepal and India have
full understanding, the situation can take a significant
turn - and the Maoists know this. In the last one year,
India has stepped up its training to Nepalese security forces
and has provided weapons, too. Besides, India has arrested
a some top Maoist leaders and handed a few of them over
to Nepal as well. I have taken this as a signal that India
is prepared to go to any length to help Nepal," said Thapa,
who is longest serving Prime Minister in Nepal under three
different monarchs. Nepal's current Prime Minister, Sher
Bahadur Deuba, who is schedule to pay a four-day visit to
India commencing September 8, will be discussing, among
other issues, the Maoist problem with Indian leaders.
In the meanwhile, possibilities of a return to peace remain
remote, though Prime Minister Deuba, addressing a delegation
of youths affiliated to the Communist Party of Nepal - Unified
Marxist and Leninist (CPN- UML), a major coalition partner,
on August 25, indicated that there could still be some hope
of resumption of the peace process, but only if the Maoists
genuinely wanted to settle the dispute through talks. "I
want durable peace. As long as the Maoists do not show any
sincere commitment towards a result-oriented peace process,
there is no question of declaring a unilateral ceasefire,"
he said, reminding the delegation that he had already been
cheated once by the Maoists in the name of peace talks.
In August 2001, the then Government headed by Deuba had
invited the Maoists for talks, only to be left high and
dry when the rebels pulled out and launched a deadly attack
on Army barracks in western Nepal - dragging the RNA into
the internal conflict and forcing Deuba to impose a nationwide
state of Emergency.
Amidst the worsening security situation in the country,
Nepal's international partners have been urging both the
sides to immediately revive the peace process. The European
Union and British special envoy to Nepal, Sir Jeffrey James,
stated: "We continue to believe that there can be no acceptable
military solution to the conflict. Hostilities continue
to inflict appalling suffering and hardship as well as damage
to Nepal's economy and the livelihoods of the Nepalese people.
The longer the conflict continues, the harder it may become
to negotiate a solution," said James, who has been visiting
Nepal regularly since his appointment in February 2002,
in a written statement.
Despite his reservations regarding Maoist commitments to
a peace process, Prime Minister Deuba constituted a high
level committee under his own leadership, on August 12.
The committee members include CPN-UML General Secretary,
Madhav Kumar Nepal, Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) leader
Pashupati Sumsher Rana, Nepal Sadbhavana Party (NSP) leader
Badri Prasad Mandal, and Minister of Information Dr. Mohammad
Mohsin.
The CPN-UML, one of the Deuba Government's main allies,
is pressing for the announcement of a unilateral ceasefire
by the Government as a prelude to the resumption of negotiations.
"The week-long blockade by the Maoists has shown that the
time has come to resume the negotiations with the Maoists,"
said the CPN-UML strong-man, Madhav Nepal.
Under intense pressure from the party, Deputy Prime Minister
and senior CPN-UML leader, Bharat Mohan Adhikary, has repeatedly
called on the Maoists to resume the peace process: "We are
earnestly urging the Maoists to come for talks. This Government
was formed to hold the peace talks with the Maoists. We
urge them to see reason and come for talks and discuss anything
they want."
Some intellectuals have expressed the opinion that the Government's
efforts for peace have been inadequate. "The Maoists will
not come for talks just because the Government invites them
by issuing a statement through Radio Nepal. There have to
be credible moves to assure them," said Padma Ratna Tuladhar,
a former facilitator of the Government-Maoist talks. "The
Government needs to withdraw the 'terrorist' tag, drop red-corner
notices and announce a unilateral ceasefire to exhibit that
credibility."
Although both parties to the conflict are yet to show signs
of flexibility, the recent withdrawal of the blockade of
the Kathmandu Valley by the Maoist might - just might
- open a small window of opportunity for a resumption of
the negotiation process.
